Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Ramesh R And Others vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|31 July, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE B.S.PATIL WRIT PETITION No.11794/2017 & W.P.No.33200/2017 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN:
1. SRI RAMESH .R S/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.119/4, GANESHA TEMPLE ROAD, DODDAKALLASANDRA, BENGALURU – 560 062.
2. SRI SHANTHAKUMAR S/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.119/4, DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU.
3. SRI ANANDA KUMAR S/O. RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO.119/4, DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGLURU.
4. SMT. LAKSHMI D/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.119/4, DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU.
5. SMT. SUJATHA D/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT MACHANGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE, TUBUGERE HOBLI, DODDABALLAPURA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
6. SMT. RAJAMMA W/O. RAMANJANEYA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT VASANTHAPURA, DODDAKALLASANDRA 8TH CROSS, KUVEMPU NAGARA, KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU.
7. SMT. KAVITHA D/O. LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO.586, VALLABHA EDUCATION TRUST, VASANTHAPURA, DODDAKALLASANDRA, 8TH CROSS, KUVEMPUNAGAR, KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI: ANANDA K., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE BENGALURU METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD., 3RD FLOOR, B.M.T.C. COMPLEX, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 1ST FLOOR, R.P. BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAY KUMAR A. PATIL, AGA FOR R-1;
SRI P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3) ***** THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARDS DATED 11.05.2016 IN RESPECT OF THE LAND MEASURING 27.3 SQ.MTRS ACQUIRED IN SY.NO.55/6A OF DODDAKALLASANDRA VILLAGE AND PASSED BY R-3 AT ANNEX-D AND ALSO THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 03.10.2016 ISSUED BY R-3 AT ANENX-E; AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for respondent no.1.
2. Learned Counsel Mr. K.Krishna undertakes to appear for respondent no.2.
3. Petitioners are the children of late Ramakrishnappa and late Chandramma. Chandramma – mother of the petitioners was the absolute owner of the property bearing Sy. No.55/6A of Doddakallasandra village, Vasanthapura Ward No.197. The total measurement of the property was 7 guntas. Out of the said 7 guntas, a portion of 78.80 sq. mtrs. and 27.30 sq. mtrs. was acquired by the State for the purpose of Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Respondent No.3 – Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed a general award dated 11.05.2016 in respect of both the pieces of land vide Annexures-E & F. Petitioners are aggrieved by the same.
4. Petitioners contend that in respect of similarly placed persons, KIADB has granted higher compensation by acting under Section 29(2) of the Act based on the consent and agreement of land losers. It is in this background, petitioners have approached this Court seeking to quash the general award and for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners as per Section 29(2) of the Act.
5. Learned counsel for both parties submit that in W.P.No.31238/2016 disposed of on 23.09.2016, this Court, while setting aside the general award, has issued direction to the respondent - Special Land Acquisition Officer therein to consider the case of the petitioner for determination of compensation by way of agreement under Section 29(2) of the Act. Observations made and directions issued therein in paragraph 3 of the order are usefully extracted as under:
“In the circumstances, this petition is allowed. General Award at Annexure-C insofar as it relates to petitioner is quashed. A direction shall ensue to the third respondent – Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, to consider the case of the petitioner for determination of compensation by way of agreement under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, to be complied with as expeditiously as possible within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that this order is applicable if there is no dispute to title to the immovable property acquired and if there is one, then the general award insofar as petitioner is concerned will stand restored, until the dispute is resolved in favour of the petitioner. The third respondent is permitted withdraw the award amount in relation to the aforesaid land, if deposited in the Civil Court. No costs.”
6. Following the order dated 23.09.2016 passed in W.P.No.31238/2016, this writ petition is also disposed of in similar terms.
7. Writ petition is allowed. General award dated 11.05.2016 passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is set aside insofar as petitioners are concerned. Respondents are directed to determine the compensation by way of agreement under Section 29(2) of the Act, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Compensation shall be paid to the petitioners, if there is no dispute with regard to title to the land in question. If there is any such dispute, then the general award will stand restored. Respondent No.3 – Special Land Acquisition Officer is permitted to withdraw the amount deposited, if any, in the Civil Court, so as to enable him to disburse the same in accordance with law.
8. Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance within three weeks from today.
Learned Counsel Mr. K.Krishna appearing for respondent no.2 and learned Counsel Mr. P.V.Chandrashekar appearing for respondent no.3 is permitted to file vakalath within two weeks from today.
Sd/- JUDGE KK
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Ramesh R And Others vs The State Of Karnataka And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
31 July, 2017
Judges
  • B S Patil